CAPÍTULO ESTUDIANTIL DE LA SOCIEDAD AMBIENTE MARINO

Satellite and fisheries data show areas in Atlantic Ocean where leatherback turtles and fishermen clashVirginia Gewin

The Atlantic Ocean is home to the last large populations of leatherback turtles — but it is not always a hospitable habitat. The migratory nature of the turtles, the world's largest, makes them vulnerable to unintended capture by fishermen.But with such ‘bycatch’ largely unreported, and the leatherbacks (Dermochelys coriacea) meandering across wide swaths of the Atlantic, understanding how best to protect them has been difficult. Now scientists have used satellite data that tracks turtle paths between 1995 and 2010 to help identify nine zones in the Atlantic Ocean where leatherbacks and fishermen are most likely to clash1. “We know bycatch is a huge problem, but it’s knowing where, when and in what fisheries that hasn’t been clear,” says Brendan Godley, a conservation scientist at the University of Exeter, UK, and lead author of the study published today in Proceedings of the Royal Society B. Godley’s research pinpoints four high-risk sites in the north Atlantic and five in the south Atlantic[1], including areas within the exclusive economic zones of 12 different countries — among them the United States and United Kingdom. Atlantic leatherback populations are relatively robust compared to their Pacific Ocean counterparts, which have declined to the point that they are considered “critically endangered” by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. A similar study published in January2 found few areas showing high interaction between Pacific leatherbacks and fishermen — most likely because the turtle population there had already been wiped out, possibly because of bycatch, says John Roe, a biologist at University of North Carolina at Pembroke who led the research.Reversing this trend in the Pacific will be difficult, if not impossible, says Matthew Witt, an Exeter conservation biologist who co-led the Atlantic Ocean study. “We’re trying to avert what happened in the Pacific,” he says. His team combined satellite data showing standardized tracks from over 100 turtles, correcting for bias in spatial, with longline-fisheries data to identify areas of low, medium and high interaction between humans and turtles. Their map covers the Atlantic in a grid with squares measuring 5 degrees latitude by 5 degrees longitude. Rebecca Lewison, a conservation ecologist at San Diego State University in California, says that such analyses make it harder for governments to ignore the danger bycatch poses to migratory species such as the leatherback. “If we are serious about preventing extinctions of pelagic species, we have to look at these ocean-wide scales,” she says. Ultimately, though, it is coastal fishing gear, such as gillnets and trawls, that may pose the greatest risk to the turtles. With that in mind, researchers hope to incorporate data on those dangers into future maps.“The ocean is constantly changing,” says Peter Dutton, a biologist with NOAA in La Jolla, California. “We ultimately want to create tools that can predict where leatherbacks will be, and use those tools to help fishermen make decisions on where to fish.”Source: http://www.nature.com/news/mapping-pinpoints-turtles-danger-zones-1.14705

Dominican Government unveils plan to protect Hispaniola’s only rainforest Santo Domingo.- The Government launched Tuesday the Plan to Recover and Preserve Los Haitises National Park (northeast), and issued, among other measures, a three-year deadline to completely eradicate all human activity within the protected area, home to Hispaniola’s only rainforest. Environment minister Bautista Rojas, who also heads the Special Commission which designed the plan to preserve the ecosystem, said president Danilo Medina received the proposal yesterday, which includes RD$2.4 billion funding for the 43 activities to protect Los Haitises indefinitely. He said pending compensation will be paid to those evicted from the protected area in 1992 and tp relocate human settlements in the conservation area. The official said a census will start at once to determine how many people live in the Park’s core area, and a study of the five adjacent provinces to ensure a proper settlement. "The plan also includes a stronger protection component of the Park with patrols, as well as the development of an effective inter-institutional coordination with community participation." Housing As to housing for relocated people, National Housing Institute (INVI) director Alma Fernández said the Government will provide housing in an area near Los Haitises. Rain forest Los Haitises, located southeast of Samana peninsula, boasts unrivaled biodiversity fed by 110 rivers and streams and the most rainfall in the entire island of Hispaniola shared by Haiti and Dominican Republic.Source: http://www.dominicantoday.com/dr/tourism/2014/2/12/50522/DominicanGovernment-unveils-plan-to-Hispaniolas-only-rainforest

By Sea Turtle Conservation BonaireOn September 12th 2013, Carolien, a female Hawksbill Sea Turtle, crawled ashore to lay what would be her final nest of the season on Klein Bonaire. 85 days and over 5,000 km (3,000 mi) later Carolien would reach Honduras - the sixth country visited along her lengthy migration home. The coastal waters around Honduras are likely to be Carolien’s “home foraging ground”, where she spends the majority of her adult life. Bonaire's breeding turtles like Carolien return to Bonaire - “their place of birth” - every two to three years to breed and, if female, nest.

Equipped with a satellite transmitter fixed to her carapace, this critically endangered Hawksbill Sea Turtle became the 24th turtle tracked by Sea Turtle Conservation Bonaire. Identifying sea turtles' migratory routes and distant foraging grounds aids understanding of the species and provides valuable information in support of strategies for regional conservation.

No signal has been received from Carolien’s transmitter since December 26th, meaning it is likely out of battery, broken, or detached from her carapace. However, Carolien had been in the same location - 135 km (84 miles) northeast of Honduras for three weeks, indicating her migration was likely complete. This general area, where Honduran, Colombian and Panamanian waters come together, has proven to be of great importance to Bonaire’s breeding turtles - eight of the 24 tracked have returned here.

Carolien’s migration path was unusual and not highly efficient to reach Honduras. She left Bonaire west to visit the coastal waters of both Curaçao and Aruba, cruised across the Caribbean Sea west at a rapid pace (for several days she averaged 7.4 kph or 4.6 mph!), then looped around south in Panamanian waters of the Kuna Yala Archipelago, only to return north again through Colombian, Nicaraguan and eventually Honduran waters. Despite being known as exceptional navigators, sea turtles do make migration errors, which perhaps explains Carolien’s 5,000 km (3,000 mi) swam to reach a destination only 1,600 km (1,000 mi) away. It is also typical however, for sea turtles to use ‘stopover’ areas to help refuel energy on their journey home.

Great Migration Game Winners The third year of the “Great Migration Game” had 50 participants make their prediction and follow Carolien’s satellite feed live online to her home foraging grounds. Congratulations to the winner, Glenny Albertina, whose prediction was only 130 km (80 mi) from Carolien’s last transmission! Glenny wins a brand new Blackberry and full year of service. Naiguata Winklaar (150 km, 93 mi) and Mikyla Klamm (200 km, 124 mi) finished close behind Glenny in second and third place. Chris Ball, Marie Algra, Jan and Amber Brouwer, Max Walraven, Marijke Polspoel, Shakir Boekhoudt and Erwin Plessers round out the top ten, who all receive their choice of STCB merchandise.

STCB's 2013 satellite tracking is made possible thanks to generous financial support from the Valley Foundation. The mission of the Valley Foundation is to support projects that are focused on providing access to fresh water for nature and for humans. Sea Turtle Conservation Bonaire (STCB) is a non-governmental research and conservation organization that has been protecting sea turtles since 1991. Our mission is to ensure the protection and recovery of Bonaire's sea turtle populations throughout their range.Source: http://us1.campaign-archive2.com/?u=9cc609f968966885d2940e022&id=82539a2f20

Five features that can improve conservation efforts within marine protected parks Good intentions are never enough and when it comes to biodiversity conservation it can become painfully evident. In a new study published in Nature, centre researcher Stuart Kininmonth, together with an international team of marine experts and conservationists, show how the current structure of many marine parks designed for conservation, or Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), are largely inefficient with little or no difference in protection between fish living within these areas and those living in fished areas.Paper parksKininmonth and his colleagues counted numbers and sizes of over 2000 fish species along underwater transect lines set at 1986 sites in 40 countries. The study, unprecedented in its global scale – included the efforts of over 100 recreational divers collecting data in their spare time for the Reef Life Survey programme, a new concept in marine conservation where scientists, marine managers, and recreational divers work together to collect and analyse broad-scale biodiversity information.They then used this information to measure how fish communities in 87 MPAs worldwide differed from those in nearly fished areas."Our study reveals the need for more efficient marine protected areas. Indeed many of them today are only 'paper parks' – areas drawn on the map with no measurable benefits for conservation," Kininmonth says.Those areas that were considered effective were typically:1. no-take areas2. well-enforced3. more than 10 years old4. large in area 5. isolated by deep water or sand from fished areasMPAs with these characteristics had on average eight times more large fishes, nine times more groupers, and 20 times more sharks than fished areas, the study shows.Not reaching full potentialProfessor Graham Edgar, the lead author of the paper, highlighted the importance of establishing more effective MPAs."The need for protected areas that safeguard whole communities of marine species has never been greater given the huge changes now occurring in out-of-sight underwater and our poor knowledge of exactly what is happening. At present, coastal zoning maps are confusing, with the few conservation gems hidden amongst protected areas that are ineffective because of inadequate regulations or poor enforcement," Edgar says.Stuart Kininmonth says that global conservation targets based on area alone will not optimize protection of marine biodiversity."MPAs often fail to reach their full potential because of issues such as illegal harvesting, regulations that legally allow detrimental harvesting, or emigration of animals outside boundaries because of continuous habitat or inadequate size of reserve," he says.“More emphasis is needed on better MPA design, durable management and compliance to ensure that MPAs achieve their desired conservation value.” Edgar, G.J., Stuart-Smith, R. D., Willis, T.J., Kininmonth, S., Baker, S.C., Banks, S., Barrett, N.S., Becerro, M.A., Bernard, A.T.F., Berkhout, J., Buxton, C.D., Campbell, S. J., Cooper, A.T., Davey, M., Edgar, S.C., Forsterra, G., Galvan, D.E., Irigoyen, A. J., David, Kushner, J., Moura, R., Parnell, P. E., Shears, N. T., Soler, G., Strain, E.M.A., Thomson, R.J. 2014. Global conservation outcomes depend on marine protected areas with five key features, Nature, DOI: 10.1038/nature13022 Source: http://www.stockholmresilience.org/21/research/research-news/2-5-2014-not-just-drawings-on-a-map.html

By Dr. Gerald Goeden A big part of the problem in conserving sharks is that we don't understand them. We see them as a threat and of no real benefit.My interest in sharks was like everyone’s – morbid. A shark attack with photos was front page news and each sparked debate in the dive clubs over the best way to avoid becoming the next victim. I sometimes carried a ‘bang stick’ so I could fight these villains if it came to the worst. When I started work on the Great Barrier Reef back in the '70's, I got a surprise. The sharks seemed bigger, more numerous, and very brave compared to their Caribbean brothers. Australian shark attacks were front page stories and dominated the news for days. And yet there I was working for hours every day, year after year within metres of these predators and all I had to do to avoid trouble with the tropical species was respect their territories and not swim around with speared fish on my belt. The November issue of Conservation Biology published a review of media coverage of sharks. According to Meredith Gore, MSU assistant professor of fisheries and wildlife, Australian and U.S. news articles were more likely to focus on negative reports featuring sharks and shark attacks rather than conservation efforts. "The most important aspect of this research is that risks from ­- rather than to -- sharks continue to dominate news coverage in large international media markets," said Gore. So how real is the case against sharks?Every year about 100 shark attacks are reported worldwide. In 2011, just 17 fatalities were recorded as having being caused by sharks, out of 118 attacks. Although shark attacks are infrequent, there is a heightened awareness due to occasional serial attacks; “it’s out there and it’s after me”. Horror fiction like Jaws appears on TV just often enough to keep this fear alive and even “nature” shows only show sharks in frenzied feeding.

Shark attack experts are adamant that the danger has been greatly exaggerated. According to the International Shark Attack File (ISAF), between the years 1580 and 2011 there were 2,463 confirmed unprovoked shark attacks around the world, of which 471 were fatal. Surprisingly, that’s only 1.09 fatalities per year for the last 431 years

Australia is ranked second in terms of global shark attacks with 877 attacks since colonial settlement in the 18th century; it’s ranked the highest in terms of shark fatalities, with only 217 during this long period.

According to Time/ CNN : Zoologists today estimate elephants around the world kill 500 people a year while the great white sharks (Jaws) kill only 4 people. Incredibly, there are about 24,000 lightning deaths (one every 20 minutes) and 240,000 injuries worldwide annually (Royal Aeronautical Society, 2003). When was the last time we read stories of the lurking danger above or watched a movie where people were struck down like dominoes by searing thunder bolts?Why is shark conservation so important and why is it being neglected? The first part of this question is easy. Sharks are in big trouble. "Overfishing of sharks is now recognized as a major global conservation concern, with increasing numbers of shark species added to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature's list of threatened species," say Mizue Hisano, Professor Sean Connolly and Dr William Robbins from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies and James Cook University.

On March 1, 2013, "Global Catches, Exploitation Rates and Rebuilding Options for Sharks," was published by Dr. Worm and other researchers from Dalhousie University, the University of Windsor in Canada, as well as Stony Brook University in New York, Florida International University (FIU) in Miami and the University of Miami. A very powerful team indeed. Their shocking findings put the carnage at 97 million in 2010. The possible range of mortality is between 63 and 273 million annually. This equates to somewhere between 7,200 and 31,000 sharks per hour. Now in March, 2013; "This is a big concern because the loss of sharks can affect the wider ecosystem," said Mike Heithaus, executive director of FIU's School of Environment, Arts and Society. "In working with tiger sharks, we've seen that if we don't have enough of these predators around, it causes cascading changes in the ecosystem, that trickle all the way down to marine plants." Such changes harm other species, and destroy commercial fisheries, Heithaus explains. Why we are neglecting shark conservation is harder to answer. First, there have been powerful economic reasons to turn a blind eye to shark fishing and shark finning. These may not have been good reasons but greed is a characteristic of human behaviour and we make lots of poor decisions because of it. A second explanation comes from deep in the primitive part of our brains. Our prehistoric ancestors had the very same fears that we do according to Psychology Today. We were ‘designed’ to be afraid; fear was our operating manual for things we didn’t understand or that could do us harm. Fears protected our ancestors. “Our distant ancestors who were afraid of heights didn’t fall off cliffs, those that feared wild animals didn’t get eaten, those that ran the fastest left the rest behind---and they survived.” Surveys of people show different fears for different cultural groups but amazingly many fears are of animals never encountered by the people who fear them. Top of the list is spiders and number 10 are alligators and crocodiles. Sharks come in at number six according to Animal Planet. Elephants are not on our list of feared animals and we donate millions of dollars each year to protect them even though they kill thirty times more people than sharks. Why can’t we see that the health of our ocean hangs in the balance and that we are making decisions with our ancestor’s fears and not with our future in mind? This report is based on similar articles by myself published in Epoch Times. It is posted here for educational purposes only. I wish to thank my friends Ellen Cuylaerts and Shawn Heinrichs for their amazing photos. Source: http://goedenshark.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-shark-menace-real-risk-of-shark.html

"More than 100 divers agreed to donate their time, learning scientific underwater survey techniques, using their weekends and holidays to collect new data, and spending long hours afterwards identifying species and entering data onto computer spreadsheets” Graham Edgar

Marine protected areas have been created across the globe to stem the loss of biodiversity in our oceans. But are they working? Now, thanks to a six-year survey involving over one hundred divers, we know that the global system of marine protected areas still has much to achieve.

The marine environment lies out of sight and is expensive to survey, so its true condition is very poorly known. What we do know is that multiple threats—most notably introduced pests, climate change, fishing and pollution—are pervasive. We also know that conditions are deteriorating. Numbers of many Australian marine species have collapsed since European settlement. Some species haven't been seen for decades, such as the smooth handfish, which was once sufficiently abundant to be collected by early French naturalists visiting Australia but hasn't been seen anywhere for more than 200 years. If this were a mammal, bird, reptile, frog or plant, it would be listed under Commonwealth and state threatened species acts as extinct. As a marine fish, it has not been considered for any list.We also know that marine species that build habitat for other species are declining. Coral cover across the Great Barrier Reef has been reduced by about 25% between 1986 and 2004. Global seagrass and mangrove cover have declined by 30% over the past century, with losses accelerating. And oyster reefs have largely disappeared worldwide, as have giant kelp forest ecosystems on the Tasmanian east coast. Fishery catch statistics also show major population declines in commercially important species such as scallops, rock lobsters, barracouta, trumpeter, abalone, warehou, gemfish and sharks. These snapshots all consistently indicate major detrimental change in our oceans.Twenty years ago, in a bid to understand the magnitude of this change, I and my Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies colleague Neville Barrett began regularly surveying rocky reef communities in collaboration with management agencies across southern Australia. These surveys were focused inside and outside marine protected areas, to disentangle effects of fishing from broader environmental changes. We found that each marine protected area was different. Recovery within protected areas depended on a variety of local factors, including protected area size and age, how much fishing had occurred prior to regulation, the type of regulations, and whether they were enforced. To separate these individual factors properly required investigation of tens to hundreds of protected areas, many more than we could logistically cover with our limited scientific resources.Enlisting citizen diversThis led to the idea of enlisting support from the recreational diving community, and our new study was born. With pilot funding from the Commonwealth Environment Research Facilities program, and on-ground direction from colleague Rick Stuart-Smith, we sought help from experienced recreational divers across Australia who are passionate about marine conservation. More than 100 divers agreed to donate their time, learning scientific underwater survey techniques, using their weekends and holidays to collect new data, and spending long hours afterwards identifying species and entering data onto computer spreadsheets. To facilitate this program, an independent organisation called Reef Life Survey was established. It aimed to train and support member divers during field surveys, and to distribute information collected to improve knowledge and management of marine species. An incredible amount has been achieved over the past six years through the generous efforts of Reef Life Survey divers.Most importantly, we have established a quantitative baseline describing the current state of inshore biodiversity around Australia. Numbers of more than 2500 species of fish, seaweeds and invertebrates (such as lobsters, abalone, sea urchins and corals) at more than 1500 sites have been documented. This is the largest marine ecological baseline for any continent worldwide. It provides an invaluable reference that can be referred to through the future for tracking impacts of climate change, pollution, introduced species, and fishing. The Reef Life Survey baseline has also now extended globally through collaboration with scientists in 18 countries, and with additional survey data collected by trained volunteer divers during their overseas holidays. Parks on paper, not in the ocean Still the question remains: how effective are marine protected areas at conserving marine life? We recently analysed data from 40 countries to understand better the underlying factors that make marine protected areas effective as conservation tools, with results published in the journal Nature today. We found no difference between fish communities present in most of 87 marine protected areas studied worldwide, when compared with communities in fished areas with similar environmental conditions. Many protected areas thus seem to be "paper parks" — lines on the map that fail to achieve desired conservation outcomes.However, some protected areas are extremely effective, with massive numbers of large fish and extremely high conservation value. These effective protected areas are typified by the same recurring features: no fishing, well enforced, more than 10 years old, relatively large in area, and isolated from fished areas by habitat boundaries (deep water or sand). Protected areas with these characteristics, such as Middleton Reef off northeastern New South Wales, had on average twice as many species of large fish per transect, eight times more large fish, and 20 times more sharks than fished areas.Source: http://www.projectaware.org/update/world%E2%80%99s-largest-survey-marine-parks-shows-conservation-can-be-greatly-improved